LIETUVIŲ LEKSIKOS IR TERMINOLOGIJOS PROBLEMOS LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXIX (1991)

SAULIUS AMBRAZAS

HISTORICAL RELATIONS OF LITHUANIAN NOMINA AGENTIS WITH DIMINUTIVES

Names of bearers of verbal properties (nomina agentis, hereafter NAg) constitute one of the oldest derivational categories. However, of the Indo-European NAg derivational formatives, apparently only the ending -as has survived in Lithuanian. All the other derivational affixes with which NAg are now formed in Lithuanian (and there are more than 190 of them) arose on Baltic linguistic soil. Most developed from the formatives *-lo-, *-no-, *-to-, *-ro-, *-uo-, *-jo- through the nominalization of verbal adjectives. Other suffixes were borrowed from the following derivational categories: verbal abstracts, instrument nouns, names of bearers of nominal properties, and diminutives. In this article we survey NAg with suffixes of diminutive origin. NAg and diminutives are close not only in form but also in meaning; many NAg, especially those derived from verbs of state, have a pejorative nuance, also characteristic of diminutives (cf. the numerous NAg with the suffix -ėlis: išp̌akėlis, suskrėtėlis, susnūdėlis, and so on).

Derivatives with the suffixes -ikas, -ikis

With the suffix -ikas (as with the suffix -ėjas), names of agents are currently formed in Lithuanian from primary verbs (Urbutis, 1965, 320—321). Derivatives of this type are most characteristic of the Western Aukštaitian dialect, while they are somewhat less common among Eastern Aukštaitians (LKA III Map No. 114). K. Sirvydas’s dictionary shows that this was also the case in the seventeenth century: here we find only one derivative of this type, lojikas (kundel, szczekacz) SD¹ 57; SD³ 141.

There were very many NAg with the suffix -ikas in the Western Aukštaitian dialect of Lithuania Minor. In the surviving German–Lithuanian section of J. Brodovski’s dictionary, derivatives of this type are only slightly fewer than NAg with the suffix -ėjas (their ratio here is 22:29). In F. Kurschat’s Lithuanian–German dictionary, NAg with the suffix -ikas considerably outnumber derivatives with the suffix -ėjas (their ratio is 167:133). The productivity of NAg with the suffix -ikas in the Western Aukštaitian dialect of Lithuania Minor is demonstrated by the many rare derivatives.

⁹Derivatives of this type are known only from F. Kurschat’s dictionary: bružikas (wer scheuert)¹, cypikas, kuukikas, klykikas, knaisikas, kvėpikas (der Haucher), likikas (wer zurückblät), plėlikas (wer züchtigt, prägelt), virtikas (wer fällt).

¹German and other-language equivalents are given only for Lithuanian derivatives whose meaning is not clear from their formation. Also, to save space, page numbers are not provided for F. Kurschat’s and some other dictionaries, since they can easily be found under the headwords (F. Kurschat usually lists derivatives with the suffixes -ojas, -ėjas and -ikas under the corresponding verbs).

4

52 agent nouns (NAg) with the suffix -ikas are also recorded in A. Kuršaitis’s dictionary. Most are derived from unprefixed primary verbs: avikas (the one who puts on footwear), bėrikas, cirpikas, gynikas (the (cattle) driver), gnybikas, gobikas, gremždikas, griejikas, grumzdikas, gujikas (the hunter or driver), kimšikas, kišikas, kleipikas, knarkikas, košikas, kreikikas, krypštikas, maukikas, merkikas (one who soaks), miežikas, mojikas, movikas, pliekikas, rėkikas, riekikas, siekikas, smeigikas, sosikas (one who torments), spendikas, splėtikas (one who spreads, lays out), šlamštikas, šleikikas, šliejikas, trenkikas, trieškikas (one who crushes or presses), žengikas, žergikas, žėrikas, žindikas, žvelgikas.

Two such derivatives are formed from prefixed verbs: apvilkikas, atkirti-kas, and three derivatives from mixed-type verbs: bildikas, blazgikas, čiulbikas.

In the writings of Lithuania Minor, NAg also occur with the paradigmatic variant -ikis of the suffix -ikis, -ė. Four derivatives of this type are found in F. Kuršaitis’s dictionary: kulikis (the thresher) (also Kin – LKŽ VI 831), paganikis, -ė (errand boy or errand girl) (also C I 952; N 256), pagunikis “the same,”² pjovikis (one who cuts) (the same also in R I 106; N 303; RD 142; BR 1 Sam 7, 12); cf. also lopikis (old patcher) C I 77, lupikis (robber) C II 268; (executioner) N 378. It is uncertain whether the derivative skubikis “one who works in haste” B 387; Kal. is formed from the adjective skubùs or from the verb skubėti. One NAg with the suffix -ikis occurs in M. Daukša’s Postil – siuvikis (tailor) 142₃, 378₂₁, 582₄₉.

In Latvian, only one or two NAg with the corresponding suffix -ikis are used (apparently from an older -ikas), e.g.: minikis “one who tramples” (cf. Lithuanian mynikas), lāpikis “patcher” (cf. Lithuanian lopikas, lopikis; see Endzelīns, 1951, 358).

Direct counterparts to Lithuanian NAg with the suffix -ikas (or -ikis) are found in Prussian: mynix (Gerwer) E 511 (cf. Lithuanian mynikas), schwuwikis (Schuhwert) E 496 (cf. siuvikas, siuvikis). On the basis of the verbal abstract widekausnan (Gezeūgnis) I 5₂₁, the NAg *widikas “one who sees, witness” is reconstructed: Prussian widdai (sahe) III 113₃. V. Mažiulis (1974, 215—217) considers that Prussian genix (Specht) E 742 may also be an NAg (not a diminutive) (cf. Lithuanian genėti). Given that the most productive Baltic NAg suffixes *-tāio- and *-ēio- (for further discussion, see Ambrazas, 1989) are represented in Prussian monuments by only two derivatives, artoys (Ackermann) E 236 and gewineis (Knecht) E 191, it may be assumed that NAg with the suffix *-iko- was no less widespread in Prussian than in the West Aukštaitian dialect of Lithuanian.

Baltic NAg with the suffix *--iko- have cognates in the Slavic languages. About 20 Proto-Slavic NAg were formed with the suffix -ьсь (< *-iko-; Wojtyła-Świerzowska, 1974, 82—87). Some of them have exact counterparts in the Baltic languages. Particularly old is Lithuanian siuvikas, corresponding not only to Old Prussian schuwikis, but also to the derivative *šьvьcь⁴ found in all Slavic languages; compare also Lithuanian mynikas, Latvian minikis, Old Prussian mynix and Slavic *mьnьcь, Lithuanian badikas and Slavic *bodьcь, Lithuanian ėdikas and Slavic *ědьcь, Lithuanian paganikas and Slavic *gonьcь⁵.

² Dėl darbovos žr. Būga, 1959, 277; Skardžius, 1943, 131; Otrebski, 1965, 277.

³ Endzelins, 1943, 49, 273; Mažiulis, 1981, 70.

⁴ Brugmann, 1906, 490; Būga, 1958, 275; Trautmann, 1923, 86; Endzelynas, 1957, 88 ir kiti.

⁵ Trautmann, 1923, 185; Wojtyła-Świerzowska, 1974, 82, 83, 84—85, 88; Мартынов, 1973, 30.

5

Kai kuriose slavų kalbose yra NAg ir su priesaga -bč (< *-ik̑io-, žr. Sławskį, 1974, 102), atitinkančia lie. -ikis, plg. lie. paganikis ir ukr. погонич, serb.-chorv. погонић (Мартынов, 1973, 31).

The use of the suffix *-iko- (or *-ik̑io-) to form NAg is a common Balto-Slavic innovation. However, the derivational category from which this suffix was borrowed has not yet been established. In Old Indic, Greek, Latin, and some other Indo-European languages, substantival adjectives are formed with the suffix *-iko-, e.g., OInd. vār-sikah ‘rainy’, Gk. ἱππικός ‘equine’, Lat. patricus ‘paternal’, and so on. K. Brugmann (1906, 488–490) and some later scholars⁶ argued that the Balto-Slavic NAg (as well as nouns denoting bearers of a nominal characteristic) with the suffix *-iko- are substantivized adjectives. If this assumption is accepted, one would have to suppose that they became substantivized in the very distant past, since adjectives derived from nouns with the suffix *-iko- are formed neither in Baltic nor, apparently, in Slavic. The assumption therefore does not seem convincing.

It is most likely that the suffix *-iko- entered the NAg derivational paradigm from the category of diminutives. Today, diminutives with the suffix -ikas are very rare in Lithuanian. J. Gerullis and Ch. Stang (1933, 25) provided two such derivatives from the fishermen’s dialect of Lithuania Minor: puodikas ‘little pot’, staldikas ‘small stable’. From elsewhere, the following may also be cited: bernikas ‘adolescent boy’ Vlk (LKŽ I² 769), brolikas, brolykas (Bruders Sohn) Lex 401; B 295; N 346; [K] (‘adolescent boy’ V. Kud ir. – LKŽ I² 1070), karalikas (Neßelkönig) B 944; (Zaunkönig) R I 54; N 179; K II 367, stirnikas (Rehbock) N 502; [K], tarnikas (servant) DP 160₃₂, žandikas ‘little gendarme’ N 538; compare also the further derivatives bernikūtas ‘little boy’, paršiūkūtas ‘little piglet’ Zt (Vidugiris, 1969, 151).

Diminutives with the suffix -ikas were once more widespread. This is shown above all by its paradigmatic variant -ikė, with which diminutives are still regularly formed in the Samogitian dialect and neighboring Western Aukštaitian subdialects (LKA III Map No. 116). In the Zietela dialect, another variant of the suffix -ikas, -yka, is used for this purpose (Vidugiris, 1969, 149–150).

In the western Latvian dialect area, diminutives are sometimes formed with the suffix -iķis (Rūķe-Draviņa, 1959, 300–305).

Lithuanian diminutives with the suffix -ikas (or -ykas) have even clearer and relatively numerous counterparts in Old Prussian: n. pl. brātīkai (Brothers) III 89₅ (: brote ‘brother’ E 173), acc. sg. gannikan (little woman) III 105₂₅ (: genno ‘woman, i.e. wife’ E 187), acc. sg. madlikan (little prayer) III 79₁₀ (: madla ‘prayer’ III 47₁₄), malnijkix (little child) III 113₆ (: malnijks ‘child’ III 115₂₃), stūndix (little hour) III 56₉ (cf. German Stunde), acc. sg. vijrikan (little man) III 105₂₄ (: wijrs ‘man’ III 87₂).

The following derivatives probably once had a diminutive meaning as well: dellijks (article) III 39₁₆, acc. sg. dellikans (piece) III 65₈ (cf. Lithuanian dalýkas, which retained the meaning ‘part’ in old writings and some dialects, LKŽ II² 243), grandico (bole) E 632

⁶ Hirt, 1927, 284; Skardžius, 1943, 130; Wojtyła-Świerczowska, 1974, 89; Vaillant, 1974, 301; Сазненко, 1974, 181, and others.

6

(cf. Lithuanian grandis), instix (thumb, i.e. Daumen) E 114 (cf. Lithuanian dialectal inkštys, Latvian inkstis ‘thumb’) and perhaps menig (moon) E 8, which V. Mažiulis (1981, 288) reconstructs as *meniks and considers a diminutive formed from the old Indo-European word *mēnes-; cf. Lithuanian mėnukas ‘moon’ Prn; Gs; Ktė (LKŽ VII 20): mėnuo.

In Slavic languages, the corresponding suffix -ькъ (or -ьсь) is one of the principal means of forming diminutives⁷. V. Ivanov connects the suffix *-iko- with Tocharian -śke (< *-kik-, cf. Slavic -čikъ), which was widely used in the B dialect to form diminutives (Иванов, 1958). Derivatives with the suffix *-iko-/-ikā- (< i + *-ko-/-kā-) that have a diminutive meaning or one close to it are also found in Indo-Iranian⁸, Greek⁹, and other Indo-European languages (Ewald, 1924); cf. Lithuanian dialectal avikė, avẏka ‘lamb’ and Slavic *ovьca, OInd. avikāh, avikā ‘sheep’, perhaps also Welsh ewig ‘female deer’; Slavic *děvica and OInd. devikā- ‘goddess’, the Gaulish personal name Divico, Slavic *myšьka and OInd. mūṣikah, mūṣikā ‘fly’¹⁰.

Thus, the suffix *-iko- has long been used to form not only adjectives but also diminutives. In general, all Indo-European diminutive formatives (*-ko-, *-lo-, *-to-, *-no-, *-jo-) coincide with adjectival formatives. There must, then, apparently have been periods when the same formative was used to create both diminutives and adjectives (cf. Doroszewski, 1928, 239).

As the diminutive function of the suffix *-iko- weakened, it came to be used in Baltic (as in Slavic) to form nouns denoting bearers of a nominal characteristic:

a) from nouns, e.g.: Lithuanian kaukarikas ‘back of the head’ Sb. (: kaũkaras ‘hill, mound; mountain peak; forehead; back of the head’ LKŽ V 420), kaukorikas ‘big-headed child’ Šmn (: kaũkoris ‘mound, heap’ Klvr – LKŽ V 424), tarpikas ‘middle of a barn between the ends, passage through the threshing floor’ Pl; Slnt; Brs (: tárpas, see Skardžius, 1943, 127; Latvian namikis ‘gardener’ (: nams ‘house’), Old Prussian preiksiks (Feindt) III 79₂₀ (cf. Lithuanian priešas ‘enemy’ and priešininkas ‘opponent’);

b) from adjectives, e.g.: Lithuanian didikas (: didis ‘big’), naujikas (nowak, nowatny) SD³ 226 (also K.; Vaižg.; ‘new settler’ J; Kik; Vkš – LKŽ VIII 587: nau̇jas ‘new’), raudonikas ‘red one’ (: raudõnas ‘red’), šventikas (: šveñtas ‘holy’), Old Prussian acc. pl. swintickens (Heyligen) III 133₈–₉ (: swints ‘holy’ III 39₁₀), Latvian melnikis ‘black (horse)’ (: melns ‘black’) (Endzelynas, 1957, 89).

That there must have been many such nouns denoting bearers of a nominal characteristic in the Baltic languages is indicated by the suffix -inykas (which took the form -ininkas in some western Lithuanian dialects; see LKA III Map No. 115), formed when the suffix *-iko- was added to the adjectival suffix *-ino-. The suffix -inykas has clear counterparts in Old Prussian and Slavic¹¹.

Since NAg were already formed with the suffix *-iko- in Proto-Baltic, it is difficult to determine whether this suffix entered the NAg derivational paradigm directly from diminutives or—

⁷ Vondrák 1924, 620 ff.; Doroszewski, 1928; Бошкович, 1984, 206–245.

⁸ Edgerton, 1911; Wackernagel, Debrunner 1954, 311–318; Герценберг, 1972, 247.

⁹ Chantraine, 1933, 385–386; 1966; Risch, 1937, 149–150.

¹⁰ ЭСРЯ III 116; Mayrhofer 1956, 59; 1963, 668; Wackernagel, Debrunner, 1954, 313; Slawski 1974, 95; ЭССЯ V 19–20.

¹¹ Leskien, 1891, 520–521; Vondrák, 1924, 630 ff.; Endzelīns, 1943, 49–50; Endzelynas, 1957, 90; Skardžius, 1943, 140; Vaillant, 1974, 306–310; Slawski, 1974, 90–91 and others.

7

categories (like their relatives—the suffixes -(i)ukas, -okas), or through the category of names for holders of nominal characteristics (like the aforementioned suffix -inykas, which is now used in dialects to form not only names for holders of nominal characteristics but also NAg)¹².

Having discussed the development of the suffix *-iko-, we see that an older state of it is attested in the Slavic languages: a) even today, diminutives are often formed in Slavic languages with the suffix *-iko-; b) there are considerably more and more varied nominal derivatives formed with this suffix in Slavic languages; c) NAg with *-iko- are relatively few in Slavic languages (unlike in Baltic languages), and almost all were formed in Proto-Slavic. It seems that NAg with the suffix *-iko- began to be formed in the western dialects of the Baltic languages, from where this innovation spread into the Slavic languages.

Derivatives with the suffix -eika

The suffix -eika (or -eikas, -eikis) is an ablaut variant of the suffix -ikas (or -ikis); compare jauneikà Lnkv; O (LKŽ V 306) and jaunikis, jüodeikis Kitn; Ut and jüodikis ‘blood soup cooked with sorrel’ Dglš (ibid. 399, 401), Old Church Slavonic agnьcь: агньсь (Būga, 1959, 99)¹³. In the Baltic languages, this suffix is found mostly in proper names (personal names, place names, hydronyms, e.g., Gedeikas, -à, Noreikas, -à, etc.)¹⁴. Very few common nouns have been formed with the suffix -eika. A few of these are NAg. The most widespread derivative among them is mušéika (mušeika LKŽ VIII 446). Others are very rare, e.g., audeikà ‘weaver’ B 865; N 14; LTR (Grl) (LKŽ I² 456), čiupéi-ka ‘one who sucks’ Vkš (II² 164), kabeikà ‘one who nags everyone’ Brt (V 12), lindeikà ‘idler, slacker’ On (Skardžius, 1943, 159), pagiréika ‘boaster’ Grv (LKŽ IX 84), pluveikà ‘one who acts foolishly, fool’ Žl (Skardžius, 1943, 160). Some of the derivatives mentioned have an expressive connotation characteristic of diminutives.

Derivatives with the suffixes -(i)ukas, -(i)ūkas

The suffix -(i)ukas arose when the formant *-ko- was attached to the stem-final u, cf. Lithuanian žmogiùkas: žmogùs, Slavic *synъko ‘little son’: *synъ ‘son’, *sladъkъ (cf. Lithuanian saldùs), Sanskrit tanukah ‘thin, small’: tanus ‘thin; flat; small; insignificant, weak, little’ (Brugmann, 1906, 491; Ewald, 1924, 26–27). In Lithuanian, old diminutives with the suffix -ikas are exceedingly rare, whereas they are formed quite regularly with the suffix -(i)ukas in almost all Lithuanian dialects (especially Southern Aukštaitian; see LKA III Map No. 116). On the other hand, NAg with

¹² For example, in Old Russian some NAg with the suffix -ць-, -а (including those inherited from Proto-Slavic) were derivationally related not only to verbs but also to nouns, e.g. гонѣц: гонь, ёдща: ёдъ (Варбот, 1969, 82). Likewise, Lithuanian lopìkas may have been associated from early times not only with lõpyti but also with lõpas; bėgìkas not only with bėgti but also with bėgùs, and so on.

¹³ We may also recall here that the Lithuanian suffix -inykas (< -inas+-ikas) corresponds in Latvian to the suffix -(i)nieks (< -inas+-eikas), which contains the suffix -eikas (Endzelīns, 1951, 361–365; Vaillant, 1974, 310; Sławski, 1974, 91).

¹⁴ Būga, 1958, 140–142; Trautmann, 1925, 171 tt.; Endzelīns, 1943, 49; 1951, 301; Skardžius, 1943, 159–160; Vanagas, 1970, 107–110.

8

There are considerably fewer formations with the suffix -(i)ukas than with -ikas, and most of them have retained a diminutive nuance, e.g.: atžindūkas “a child taken from the breast and nursed again after some time” Užp; Srv (LKŽ I² 454), badžiūkas “burdock burr, burr” Vik (I² 553), burzdūkas “a restless, very active child” Ut (I² 1206), drėbūkas “one who trembles” Nč (II² 674), grabštūkas “thief” Rm; Srv; Mrj; Er; Pn (III 495), kiščūkas “rascal” Ob (V 880), klausūkas “one who likes to listen in from the sidelines” Aln (VI 9), laižūkas “sycophant, intriguer” Nč (VII 80), mitūkas “a somewhat grown young animal” Ut (VIII 300), murmūkas “a grumbling child” Ank (VIII 428), purkštūkas “one who snorts, one who gets angry quickly” Švnč; Rm (X 961), rinkūkas “beggar” Kal (XI 649), skundūkas “informer” Vilkv; Žvr; Alk; Jrb; Rs (XII 1131), snaūdūkas “one who dozes” Drsk; Azr (XIII 244), spirdūkas “one who kicks” Alk (XIII 420), and others (see also Skardžius, 1943, 136—137; Urbutis, 1965, 328).

A few NAg with the suffix -ucis (cognate with Lithuanian -ukas) have been noted in Latvian, e.g.: rāpučis ‘small crawling child’: rāpt ‘to crawl, creep’ (Endzelīns, 1951, 360).

In Slavic languages, the suffix -ъkъ is used to form not only diminutives but also NAg. The latter were particularly widespread in Old Polish (Doroszewski, 1928, 28—31). A few are also reconstructed for Proto-Slavic, e.g.: *godъkъ ‘one who makes unpleasant sounds’, ‘one who plays a musical instrument’: *gosti ‘to play’, *svědъkъ ‘witness’: *svěděti ‘to testify’ (Wojtyła-Świerzowska, 1974, 70—79).

The suffix -(i)ūkas has the variant -(i)ūkas in Lithuanian dialects, with which a few NAg have also been formed, e.g.: ėjūkas Plng (LKŽ II² 1113), klabūkai ‘small sleds’ Lp; Lš; Kb; Drsk; Švnč, klabūkas ‘some inferior object or animal’ Vilkv; Ig; Bgt; Gž; Rdm; Pns; ‘a bend in a scythe blade’ Pls; Rod (V 940), pakarūkas ‘one that hangs’ End (IX 157), slapūkas ‘one who avoids public view, hides’ Tt; Kv; Užv; Up; Kltn; DūnŽ (LKŽ XII 1195—1196), verčiūkas ‘one who twists words’ Kv; Als; Šts (Skardžius, 1943, 139).

The suffix -(i)ūkas derives from the same formant *-ko-, attached to a long (or lengthened) stem-final ū¹⁵, cf. Slavic *kamykъ and *kamy ‘stone’, *(i)ęzykъ and Prussian insuwis (Czunge) E 94 (< *en-ghū-¹⁶, Sanskrit madhūkāḥ ‘bee’: madhu ‘honey’ (Brugmann, 1906, 498). There are also verbal derivatives (or nominal derivatives later associated with verbs) with the suffix *-ūko- in other related languages, e.g. Slavic *vol-dyka ‘female ruler’: *volsti ‘to rule’¹⁷, Latin cadūcus ‘falling’: cado ‘I fall’,

¹⁵ Besides masculine u-stem nouns, Indo-European languages also had ū-stem nouns (mostly feminine). Most of these have survived in Slavic, Indo-Iranian, and Greek, e.g.: Slavic svekry, Sanskrit śvaśrū ‘mother-in-law’, Slavic *ljuby ‘love’, Sanskrit tanūṣ ‘body’, Greek ζῶς ‘direction, views’, etc. (Brugmann, 1906, 209—210; Specht, 1932, 217—221; Wackernagel, Debrunner, 1954, 491—498; Бернштейн, 1974, 220—241, and others). In the Baltic languages, the long ū-stem merged with the u-stem paradigm and disappeared completely (Specht, 1935, 255—257; Kazlauskas, 1968, 218—220). The former presence of the ū-stem is now indicated only by the suffixes -ūkas, -ūtas (< ū + *-to-), -ūstas (< ū + *-sto-), -ūnas (< ū + *-no-), and the like.

¹⁶ Brugmann, 1905—1906, 382; Specht, 1935, 257; Топоров, 1980, 55—59; ЭССЯ VI 74—75; IX 140.

¹⁷ The derivative *voldyka was perhaps formed from the abstract noun *voldy of a lost ū-stem verb (Brückner, 1927, 626; Отрембски, 1962, 63—64; for a different view, see ЭСРЯ I 327 with references).

9

mandūcus “glutton”: mando “chews,” cf. Skt. jaipūka- “one who murmurs incessantly (a prayer)”: jañpyate “murmurs” (Osthoff, 1896, 38–39; Brugmann, 1906, 498; Wackernagel, Debrunner, 1954, 498).

Derivatives with the suffix -(i)okas

The suffix -(i)okas developed from the form *-ko-, attached to a stem ending in ā; cf. Lith. stirniōkas: stirna, Slav. *rybako: *ryba, Skt. bhikṣā́kah “one who begs for alms”: bhikṣā “begging for alms,” Lat. fugāx “fleeing”: fuga “flight” (Brugmann, 1906, 498–501; Ewald, 1924, 21–22; Wackernagel, Debrunner, 1954, 266–267). In some Lithuanian dialects (especially eastern and southern Highland Lithuanian), diminutives denoting objects or living creatures of medium size are quite frequently formed with this suffix¹⁸. Most NAg with the suffix -(i)okas, attested from the sixteenth century onward, also retain a certain diminutive nuance.

In J. Bretkūnas’s Bible we find the rare derivative rijokas “one who eats a lot, a glutton” Mt 11, 19 (ibid. J). In his dictionary, J. Brodovskis gives two derivatives of this type: the NAg viliokas “deceiver,” still widespread today, 243, 846, and penokas “pauper,” characteristic only of the writings of Lithuania Minor, 976 (ibid. R II 277; MŽ II 371; N 284; [K]).

A whole group of NAg with the suffix -(i)okas is used in contemporary dialects, e.g.: bliūvokas “one who bellows” Vlk (LKŽ I² 932), brūžiokas “one who scrubs” Šv (I² 1105), ejokas “one who is fleet-footed” Kv (II² 1113), gerōkas “good fellow” Mrk (III 261), grajokas “one who rummages, searches, wants to grab something” Lkv (III 507), klaidōkas “wanderer, vagabond” Brb (V 943), kraustōkas “one who examines all the things” Žvr (VI 476), mušōkas “one who likes to fight” Ds; Ut; Sdk (VIII 453), plyšōkas “one who shouts and yells” Ut (X 247), sapaliōkas “one who talks nonsense” VIkv; KĮvr; Alk (XII 141), sėjokėlis “sower” Onš (XII 317), sketrōkas “a person with a webbed membrane” Dkš (XII 851), strapaliōkas “strapaila” Šn; Alkr (XIII 936), stumōkas “a stubborn horse” Mrc; “an inactive, lazy person” Alv; Švn; Lzd; Kps; Nmn; Lp; Al; Pns (XIII 1038), svajōkas “vagabond, lazybones” Dkš (XIV 269), šaipōkas “one who mocks” Sdb; Lnkv (XIV 395).

NAg are formed with the corresponding suffix -akъ (resp. -’akъ < *-(i)āko-) in some Slavic languages, e.g.: Slav. *pros’akъ “one who asks, a beggar”: *prositi, OCS težakъ “farmer”: težati “to work,” Czech žebrak “beggar”: žebrati “to beg.” The paradigmatic variant of this suffix, -ačъ (< *-ākio-), is even more widespread in Slavic languages and is one of the principal means of forming NAg¹⁹. However, diminutives are formed with the suffix *-āko- less frequently in Slavic languages. Thus, in Slavic languages this suffix entered the NAg derivational paradigm not from the category of diminutives (as in Lithuanian), but from names of bearers of nominal properties, which are quite often formed in Slavic languages with the suffix *-āko-. Therefore, NAg with the suffix *-āko- in Lithuanian²⁰ and Slavic languages are the result of parallel development.

¹⁸ Skardžius, 1943, 133–134; Urbutis, 1965, 279–280. Deminutyvų su priesaga -āks yra ir kai kuriose latvių kalbos tarmėse (Endzelīns, 1951, 360–361; Rūķe-Draviņa, 1959, 289–294).

¹⁹ Vondrák, 1927, 609–611; Wojtyła-Świerzowska, 1974, 66–74; Vaillant, 1974, 321–324: 326–329; Slawski, 1974, 89–90.

²⁰ No NAg with this suffix have been found in Latvian or Prussian.

10

Derivatives with the suffixes -utis, -utas, -uta, -ūtas

In a substantial part of the Lithuanian dialect area (especially in southwestern and southern Lithuania; see LKA III, Map No. 118), diminutives are formed quite frequently²¹. NAg with the suffix -utis, -ė are also of diminutive origin.

The derivative truputis was widespread as early as the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, most often having the now-rare meaning ‘a crumb’ (e.g.: pripilė dwilika pintiniu trupuczu VlnE 59₁₉; Surinkite kurie liko trupučius adunt ne pražutu SP II 78₁₆), and much less often with the currently usual meaning ‘a small amount of something’ (e.g.: patruputi imtu VlnE 58₂₀).

In M. Daukša’s Postil we find the unique derivative gintutis (uporny) 533₂₅. At the end of S. B. Chilinskis’s New Testament, in the appended explanations, we find žydutė (herba) 414₁. K. Sirvydas’s dictionary records the fairly rare NAg abejutis (wątpliwy) SD¹ 190 (also Ch¹ Mt 14,31; C II 1107; Gšč; Aln; cf. the adjective abejūtis, -ė ‘mediocre; unstable; unreliable; sly’ LKŽ I² 6).

In J. Brodovskis’s dictionary, besides the aforementioned truputis, we find three more derivatives of this type that are widespread today: barškutis, skambutis 797, sukutis 821. F. Kurschat’s dictionary contains the NAg tarškūtis, žibutė and the rare derivative treškutis (ein Schatterer, Pläpperer) K (also C II 407; Q 457; N 112; J; NdŽ; LTA(Rkš); Ds — LKŽK).

Several dozen NAg with the suffix -utis, -ė, formed from unsuffixed verbs, are now used in the dialects, e.g.: blaškūtis ‘one who tosses about, a windbag’ Mrk (LKŽ I² 890), burkūtis ‘pigeon’ J; Brž (I² 1192), čiauskūtis ‘one who chatters, chirps’ Rs; Vl; Čk; Nm (II² 98), čiulbūtis ‘a warbler’ Gr; Všn; Kp (II² 148), davūtis ‘one who gives’ J; Vkš; Užv (II² 343), draskūtis ‘one who quickly tears clothes; a cheeky person’ Brt; Alvt (II² 648), gaišūtis ‘one who causes delay’ SmI (III 44), gaudūtis ‘a kind of toy, a spinning top’ Pln (III 167), ieškūtis ‘a seeker’ Gs (IV 18), keikūtis ‘a swearer’ Kps (V 489), klegūtis ‘a rattle; one who likes to chatter’ Lnkv; Sd; Br; Varn; kne būtis ‘one who bends down, stooped’ J; Skr (VI 212), krapštūtis ‘one who works slowly’ Ig (VI 439), kvarkūtė ‘duck’ Skr (VI 1054), pražūtė ‘one who keeps asking’ PnmA (X 574), purškūtis ‘one who gets angry quickly’ Alk; Vlkv; Skr (X 975), spindūtė ‘a sparkler’ Ply (XIII 412), sudžiūtis ‘a dried-up person’ Jrb (XIV 47), among others (see also Skardžius, 1943, 362—364; Urbutis, 1965, 324).

In some southern Aukštaitian dialects, diminutives are also formed with the older paradigmatic variant -utas, -a of the suffix -utis, -ė (< u + *-to-), e.g. langūtas ‘little window’, kiškūtas ‘little hare’, mergutà ‘little girl’ (LKA III, Map No. 118). It is possible that the very rare NAg with the suffixes -utas: abejūtas ‘one who constantly doubts’ Jz; Kair; Kp; Svn; Bsg (LKŽ I² 6; cf. abejūtis), -uta: varguta ‘a poor, unfortunate person’ GDK 14, 47, 159, vėkuta ‘a burbot’ Antr (Skardžius, 1943, 362) are also of diminutive origin.

Just as the suffix -ukas has the variant -ūkas, so the suffix -utas has the variant -ūtas, with which a few NAg are formed, e.g.: šikūtas ‘a useless person’ Jnšk (cf. šikūtė ‘buttocks’ Plng; Klt; Tvr; Arm; TDr IV 301 (Rš), šikūtis ‘a weak person’ Vrn — LKŽ XIV 777).

²¹ Diminutives with the suffix -utis have counterparts in Latvian, Prussian (Endzelīns, 1943, 52; 1951, 386, Rūķe-Draviņa, 1959, 243—244) and, apparently, Slavic languages (Belić, 1901, 183; Отрембский, 1968, 137; Мартынов, 1973, 43—44).

11

Conclusions

1. The following diminutive-forming suffixes are used in Lithuanian to form agent nouns (NAg): -ikas (resp. -ikis), -eika, -(i)ukas (resp. -(i)ūkas), -(i)okas, -utis (resp. -utas, -uta, -ūtas).

2. Of these, the suffix -ikas entered the agent-noun (NAg) formation paradigm earliest. This had already occurred in Proto-Baltic. Agent nouns with the suffix *-iko- apparently began to be formed in the western Baltic dialects. From there, this innovation spread to other Baltic dialects and to the Slavic languages, which retained the older form of the suffix *-iko-: even today, it is used to form many diminutives in the Slavic languages (only relics of these remain in the Baltic languages), whereas very few agent nouns with the suffix *-iko- exist, and almost all were formed in Proto-Slavic. It is possible that the suffix *-iko- entered the agent-noun formation paradigm not directly from diminutives, but by way of the category of names for bearers of nominal characteristics.

3. Most agent nouns formed with other suffixes of diminutive origin carry a diminutive or pejorative nuance and are considerably more recent. Agent nouns with the suffix -ukas are cognate with Latvian agent nouns bearing the suffix -ucis, whereas Lithuanian agent nouns with the suffixes -eika, -(i)okas, -utis have no counterparts in the other Baltic languages. It is true that agent nouns are sometimes formed with the suffixes *-uko- (resp. * -ūko-), *-(i)āko- in the Slavic languages as well. However, these suffixes were probably incorporated into the agent-noun formation paradigm independently in the Baltic and Slavic languages.

ABBREVIATIONS

BR — Biblia, Tai esti: Wissas Szwentas Rāsżtas, Seno ir Naujo Testamento… Nū kel- lū Mokytojų Lietuwoj’ Lietuwiszkay pérstatytas … Karaláučzuje, 1755.

GDK — Giwatas Didžiųjų Karwaidų senowės surasze łotyniszkay Kornelius Nepos. Iszgulde… I. Dewinakis… Petropilie, 1846.

IF — Indogermanische Forschungen. Strassburg etc.

KZ — Journal for Comparative Linguistic Research in the Field of Indo-European Languages, founded by Kuhn. Berlin etc.

LKA III — Lietuvių kalbos atlasas / Ats. red. Morkūnas K. V., 1991. T. 3.

LKK — Issues in Lithuanian Linguistics.

LKŽ — Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. V., 1968–1986. T. 1–14.

ZfSl — Journal of Slavic Studies. Berlin.

ЭСРЯ — Фасмер М. Этимологический словарь русского языка. М., 1986–1987. Т. 1–4.

ЭССЯ — Etymological Dictionary of the Slavic Languages: Proto-Slavic Lexical Stock / Ed. O. N. Trubachev. Moscow, 1974–1987. Issues 1–14.

Other abbreviations are the same as those used in the comprehensive Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language.

LITERATŪRA

Ambrazas S. Priesagų -tojas ir -ėjas vedinių raida // Lietuvos TSR Mokslų Akademijos darbai. Serija A, 1989. T. 2. P. 105–112.

Belić A. Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der slavischen Diminutiv- und Amplifikativsuffixe // Archiv für slavische Philologie, 1901. Bd. 23. S. 134–206.

Brückner A. Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego. Kraków, 1927.

Brugmann K. Varia // IF, 1905–1906. Bd. 18. S. 381–382.

Brugmann K. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg, 1906. Bd. 2. T. 1.

Būga K. Rinktiniai raštai / Par. Zinkevičius Z. V., 1958–1963. T. 1–3.

12

Chantraine P. La formation des noms en grec ancien. Paris, 1933.

Chantraine P. Finales Mycéniennes en -iko // Proceedings of the Cambridge colloquiums on Mycenaean studies / Ed by L. R. Palmer, J. Chadwick. Cambridge, 1966. P. 161–179.

Doroszewski W. Monografie słowotwórcze. Formacje z podstawowym -k- w części sufiksalnej // Prace Filologiczne, 1928. T. 13.

Eckert R. Zu den nominalen -i- Stämmen im Altpreussischen // ZfSl, 1974. Bd. 19. S. 221–240.

Edgerton F. The -k- suffixes of Indo-Iranian. Part I: The k- suffixes in the Veda and Avesta // Journal of the American Oriental Society, 1911. Vol. 31. P. 93–150, 296–342.

Endzelīnas J. Baltu kalbų garsai ir formos. V., 1957.

Endzelīns J. Senprūšu valoda, Rīga, 1943.

Endzelīns J. Latviešu valodas gramatika. Rīga, 1951.

Gerulis J., Stang’as Ch. Lietuvių žvejų tarmė Prūsuose. K., 1933.

Hirt H. Indogermanische Grammatik. Heidelberg, 1927. Bd. 3.

Kazlauskas J. Lietuvių kalbos istorinė gramatika. V., 1968.

Leskien A. Die Bildung der Nomina im Litauischen. Leipzig, 1891.

Mayrhofer M. Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindisches. Heidelberg, 1956–1976. Bd. 1–3.

Mažiulis V. Altpreußische Etymologien // ZfSl, 1974. Bd. 19. S. 212–220.

Mažiulis V. Prūsų kalbos paminklai. V., 1981. T. 2.

Osthoff H. Griechische und lateinische Wortdeutungen // IF, 1896. Bd. 6. S. 1–47.

Otrębski J. Zwei Etymologien // Die Sprache, 1962. Bd. 8.

Otrębski J. Gramatyka języka litewskiego. Warszawa, 1965. T. 2.

Risch E. Wortbildung der homerischen Sprache. Berlin, 1937.

Rūķe-Draviņa V. Diminutiven im Lettischen. Lund, 1959.

Skardžius P. Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba. V., 1943.

Sławski F. Zarys słowotwórstwa prasłowiańskiego // Słownik prasłowiański. Wrocław etc., 1974. T. 1. S. 44–141.

Specht F. Die Flexion der n-Stämme im Baltisch-Slavischen und Verwandtes // KZ, 1932. Bd. 59. S. 213–298.

Specht F. Zur baltisch-slavischen Spracheinheit // KZ, 1935. Bd. 62. S. 248–258.

Trautmann R. Baltisch-Slavisches Wörterbuch. Göttingen, 1923.

Trautmann R. Die altpreußische Personennamen. Göttingen, 1925.

Urbutis V. Daiktavardžių daryba // Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. V., 1965. T. 1. P. 251–473.

Vaillant A. Gramaire comparée des langues slaves. Paris, 1974. T. 4.

Vanagas A. Lietuvos TSR hidronimų daryba. V., 1970.

Vidugiris A. Zietelos tarmės daiktavardis // LKK, 1969. T. 11. P. 147–182.

Vondrák W. Vergleichende slavische Grammatik. Göttingen, 1924. Bd. 1.

Wackernagel J., Debrunner A. Altindische Grammatik. Göttingen, 1954. Bd. 2. T. 2.

Wojtyła-Świerzowska M. Prasłowiańskie nomen agentis. Wrocław etc., 1974.

Бернштейн С. Б. Очерк сравнительной грамматики славянских языков: Чередования. Именные основы. М., 1974.

Бошкович Р. Из сравнительной грамматики славянских языков. М., 1984.

Варбот Ж. Ж. Древнерусское именное словообразование. М., 1969.

Герценберг Л. Г. Морфологическая структура слова в древних индо-иранских языках. Л., 1972.

Иванов Вяч. Вс. Тохарская параллель к славянским уменьшительным формам // IV Международный съезд славистов: Славянская филология. М., 1958. Т. 2.

Мартынов В. В. Праславянская и балтославянская деривация имен. Минск, 1973.

Отрембский Я. С. (Ред.:) Stang Ch. S. Vergleichende Grammatik der baltischen Sprachen// Вопросы языкознания, 1968. № 4. С. 135–140.

Савченко А. Н. Сравнительная грамматика индоевропейских языков. М., 1974.

Топоров В. Н. Прусский язык: Словарь (I–K). М., 1980.

13

С. АМБРАЗАС

ИСТОРИЧЕСКИЕ СВЯЗИ NOMINA AGENTIS С ДИМИНУТИВАМИ В ЛИТОВСКОМ ЯЗЫКЕ

Резюме

Для образования названий носителей профессионального признака (nomina agentis, в дальнейшем – НП) в литовском языке используются следующие суффиксы диминутивного происхождения: -ikas (resp. -ikis), -eika, -(i)ukas (resp. -(i)ūkas), -(i)okas, -utis (resp. -utas, -uta, -ūtas).

Суффикс *-iko- был включен в словообразовательную парадигму НП уже в прабалтийскую эпоху. Вероятнее всего, что очагом зарождения данной инновации были западно-балтийские диалекты, откуда она распространилась в восточно-балтийские, также и в славянские языки, в которых зафиксировано более древнее положение суффикса *-iko-, чем в балтийских языках: во многих славянских языках с суффиксом *-iko- и в настоящее время широко образуются диминутивы (в балтийских языках от диминутивов данного типа остались лишь реликты), а НП с *-iko- немногочисленны, большая часть их образована в праславянскую эпоху. Возможно, что суффикс *-iko- в словообразовательную парадигму НП был включен при посредстве категории названий носителей качественного признака.

Многие НП с другими диминутивными суффиксами в литовском языке до сих пор сохранили оттенок ласкательного или пейоративного значения и являются более поздними по происхождению. Литовские НП на -ukas родственны латышским НП на -ucis, а литовские НП на -eika, -(i)okas, -utis не имеют соответствий в других балтийских языках. НП с соответствующими суффиксами *-iko- (resp. *-īko-) в славянских языках, видимо, являются результатом параллельного развития балтийских и славянских языков.